Recent Updates - 26 September 2008

In the Recent Updates' section on the right, the 2 top entries have been added to the previous list. The 2 new ones are:

1) Proposed Lorry park - 'Newsletter No. 10' email from Peter Wood

2) Proposed Lorry park - Kentish Express 18 September 2008 - 'Why are Lorry sites secret' and 'Moveable barrier' articles (Note - Please just click on the link to make the print larger and then after reading click on the back arrow in the top left of the screen).

Recent Updates - 19 September 2008

In the Recent Updates' section on the right, the 2 top entries have been added to the previous list. The 2 new ones are:

1) Proposed Lorry park - the double page spread in the Kentish Express 11 September 2008 including:

a) Stack site may face flood danger, says KCC report, and
b) Moveable barrier will help ease traffic chaos

(Note - click on each Newspaper article to increase its size to easily read the print, once read then click on the back arrow in the top left of the screen to return and read the next article or be able to click back to the home page)

2) Proposed Lorry park - 'Newsletter No. 8' email from Peter Wood

Note -

and the ones added around 10 September are:

3)) Composting facility - Photos from Ian Medgett taken in August

4) Composting facility - A letter from Brian Ellis "The Thin Edge of the Wedge" - outlining the issues and what you need to do now

5) Composting facility - Objection email sent by Ian Medgett to Ashford government council - re the Planning Application 08/01373

6) Lorry park - Ian Medgett email to inform us that a tree preservation order is finally in place

7) Lorry park - 'Newsletter No. 8' email from Peter Wood

8) 'Proposed Lorry park' report referred to in the 'Newsletter No. 8' email from Peter Wood

After looking at any of these, just click on the 'Home Page' link at the top of the right-hand column or use the back arrow in the top left of the screen to return back to here.

Composting Facility Church Lane and other news this week

We now have a 3rd issue facing the local area - a proposed Composting facility at Church Lane, Aldington. Hence, you will see tis website now covers information about all 3 of these.

Regarding the proposed Composting Facility at Church Lane you need to urgently send your objection by 18th September 2008 - send an e-mail or write to the KCC Planning Officer and make your voice heard (information in right-hand column - number 2 - see below) , it appears that this application will go to committee and it is here that your letters will truly count.'

Additional information is that Ashford have now published all of the submitted documents onto the planning website section, including the application drawings. The application reference there is 08/01373AS.

Judging from experience with Shepway and the Quarry it would be wise for objectors to write to both Ashford and KCC - Richard Alderton at ABC and S. Whyman at KCC.

_________________________________________________________________

The recent information added in the last week can be found in the section in the right-hand column entitled 'Recent News', just below the 'Home Page' Section. It includes:

1) Composting facility - Photos from Ian Medgett taken in August

2) Composting facility - A letter from Brian Ellis "The Thin Edge of the Wedge" - outlining the issues and what you need to do now

3) Composting facility - Objection email sent by Ian Medgett to Ashford government council - re the Planning Application 08/01373

4) Lorry park - Ian Medgett email to inform us that a tree preservation order is finally in place

5) Lorry park - 'Newsletter No. 8' email from Peter Wood

6) 'Proposed Lorry park' report referred to in the 'Newsletter No. 8' email from Peter Wood

After looking at any of these, just click on the 'Home Page' link at the top of the right-hand column or use the back arrow in the top left of the screen to return back to here.

Chilly response to plans for huge lorry park - Kentish Express report - 3rd September

The following report was published in the Kentish Express on Wednesday 3rd September, click on the link to view:

http://www.kentishexpress.co.uk/news/default.asp?article_id=47424

To return here, click the 'back' arrow in the top left of the screen.

Sellindge And District Association - Address to the Meeting on 24th June 2008 - Sellindge Village News August 2008

To see the above article in the Sellindge Village News August 2008 issue please go to the section in the right-hand column, immediately below the 'Contacts' section, called 'Sellindge And District Residents Association - Address to the Meeting on June 24th 2008' and just click.

Please don't forget to click the 'Home Page' link at the top of the right-hand column to return to here.

Otterpool Quarry Water Issues - the Facts

To see a letter from a member of the Sellindge and District Residents Assocation on the 'Otterpool Quarry Water issues - the Facts' please go to the section in the right-hand column, immediately below the 'Sellindge And District Residents Association - Address to the Meeting on 24th June 2008' section, and just click.

Please don't forget to click the 'Home Page' link at the top of the right-hand column to return to here.

Shepway District Council Planning Committee Meeting unanimously Reject the Waste Plant application

Many thanks to all the village supporters who attended the Shepway District Council Planning Committee Meeting on Tuesday 29th July 7pm at Folkestone Civic Centre - it certainly made the councillors sit and up and think about the proposed AD site at Otterpool Lane, unanimously rejecting the proposed application! Now the application goes to KCC in October - we must all keep the pressure up!!!

To see the articles in the Kentish Express and Folkestone Herald of 31st July and 7th August 2008, go to the 'Shepway District Planning Meeting- 29th July 2008' section in the right-hand column just below the 'Otterpool Quarry Water Issues - the Facts' section. As usual, please don't forget to click the 'Home Page' link at the top of the right-hand column to return right here.

Also, please find below a letter from a member of the Sellindge and District Residents Assocation.
_______________________________________________________________

Dear All

NO NO NO !!! If that's not a headline, it should be. That was the opinion of Councillor Martin at the Development Control committee meeting last night, 29th July. When Councillor Martin was asked for his response to the Countrystyle application his message was clear and reflected the sentiment of not some but ALL of the committee members. He added 'Shepway District Council should be sending a clear message to Kent County Council. It should be just three words: NO NO NO'. Greeted by rapturous applause and cheers from the public gallery, the officers were in no doubt that their report would have to reflect the views of both the members and public. Well done Shepway. Well done us and in particular our lobbyists who spoke at the meeting on our behalf.

It was interesting to note that SDC had no comment to make about technical matters such as water and air pollution. We won't be dragging our heels on this issue and intend to update the members and officers on the state of the Sewer system, Aquifer, and potential pollution problems.

As a cautionary note, we must not become complacent or glory in our recent battles won. The road ahead could and probably will be a long one. Countrystyle will not be giving up easily as the financial gain for such a company is huge in this current climate.

On a personal note, I believe that the site should be used for a development that is sustainable, in keeping with the local scale, of use to the local people and above all, non polluting.

I firmly believe that our resolve and strength of character will see us through to a satisfactory conclusion.

Havoc in the hedgerows: The truth about life in the country

Havoc in the hedgerows: The truth about life in the country.

Click on the link below to read an article in 23rd July 08 Independant. It includes a section on the local proposed AD. Click on the 'Back' arrow in the top left of the Article to return to here.......

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/house-and-home/property/havoc-in-the-hedgerows-the-truth-about-life-in-the-country-874503.html

Mention the countryside and you think of natural silence broken only by birdsong. But many new initiatives have undermined the notion of the British rural idyll in recent years. Our favourite AD unit gets a mention in the Indy

Sellindge Proposed Sites - Map

A new section entitled 'Map of Sellindge', just below the 'Shepway District Planning Meeting - 29th July 2008' section, has a link to a Google map of Sellindge highlighting, via the blue balloon type shapes, the approximate position, from top to bottom, of certain points of interest:

1) The Proposed Lorry Park Site

2) The Airport Cafe

3) The Proposed Otterpool Quarry Site

4) Port Lympne Zoo

If you click on the blue balloon, a text box is displayed showing which is which. Other features of google map can be used such as display the map in terrain or map mode, zoom in/out, move up/down.

Waste Plant Meeting - Tuesday 29th July 08, 7pm, in the Civic Centre Folkesone

U R G E N T

In the Folkestone Herald 24th July, at the bottom of page 2, the Headline is 'Village awaits decision on waste plant'. The last paragraph states....

"Shepway District Council's development control committee will discuss the planning application for the site just off the A20 next week at a public meeting in the Civic Centre in Folkestone on Tuesday 29th July at 7pm. The final decision will be made by KCC this year. "

We must all attend this public meeting to make sure our feelings are known!! Please let others know and come along if at all possible.

Click on the scanned article and then it should be readable. You may be able to click on the 'back' arrow in the top left to return to here - failing that just go to this website again.

Anaerobic Digester information via 'letsrecycle' website

The website http://www.letsrecycle.com/ has lots of interesting information on Anaerobic Digester (AD) plants, including in the UK. If you put the phrase 'anaerobic digester' in the search option (found near the top right of the screen) then many useful and relevant links are displayed.

In the right-hand column, immediately below the 'Contacts' section, are some interesting ones found so far.

As one of the links states: "It must be remembered that anaerobic digestion processing for food waste has never been proven in a full scale facility in the UK. While other companies have built anaerobic digesters (including Biogen in Bedford, Biotech in Holsworthy and EarthTech in Stornaway) Greenfinch is the only plant taking around 90% food waste as its feedstock and this, is still as Mr Chesshire describes it, a "sub-commercial" project."

The Merton Policy - planners not permitted to develop without Assessing the Impact on the Local Environment and Residents

There is a very interesting policy called 'the Merton Policy', concerning the Protection of the Environment . This is to do with renewable energy sources, not just AD plants, but these are mentioned. The main point being that planners are not permitted to 'develop' where these would impact on the Local Environment and Residential Developments without following the Council requirements.

Have a look at the Policy www.merton.gov.uk/udpprotectionenv.pdf for the detail. The following Sections look particularly relevant:

PE.1: Air Quality (proposed developments that have a significantly adverse effect on Air Quality will not be permitted - the Council will require ....)

PE.2: Pollution and Amenity (proposed developments that have a significantly adverse effect on Nearby Occupiers or on the Amenity of the Locality by Noise and Disturbance or Air Pollution or Adverse Discharge onto the Land or into the water Systems will not be permitted - the Council will require ....)

PE.6: Water Quality (proposed developments that would lead to Pollution of Groundwater or Surface Water by reason of their Waste Water Discharge or Surface Water will not be permitted - the Council will ....)

PE.10: Waste Facilities (proposed Applications for Waste Management Facilities, such as for the Storage or Waste or Refuse, Waste Treatment and Reprocessing Plants including Concrete crushers, Incineration Plants and Waste Transfer/Bulk Reducing Stations will not be permitted outside the designated Industrial Areas - the Council will ....)

Need for an Environmental Impact Assessment for the Proposed Anaerobic Digesteion Plant

From: Paul Carter - KCC
Date: Thu, Jul 3, 2008
To: local resident (name withheld)

PLANNING APPLICATION: SH/08/124 - PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A MATERIALS RECYCLING FACILITY, ANAEROBIC DIGESTION PLANT AND ASSOCIATED OFFICE AND PARKING FACILITIES - OTTERPOOL QUARRY, ASHFORD ROAD, SELLINDGE, ASHFORD

Dear local resident

Thank you for your email to this office received on 15 May 2008 in connection to the response to Mr Keith Ferrin's letter of 30 April 2008 in relation to the above planning application. I apologise for the delay in responding which was due to a need to have a copy of the transcript of the Parish Council meeting you referred to.

I note that your correspondence draws attention to concerns regarding groundwater and pollution risk and the need for the application to have an environmental impact assessment. I have forwarded your concerns to the Head of Planning Applications so that she can ensure that they are addressed when the application is considered by the Planning Applications Committee.

You will be aware from Mr Ferrin's previous letter that officers dealing with the Otterpool Quarry planning application in the Planning Applications Group are still in the process of seeking further clarification in relation to potential water contamination/site drainage matters. Officers also confirmed to local residents who attended the public meeting in Sellindge this week of the need for a number of outstanding matters that need to be fully explored before a decision can be taken on the application. Water pollution and drainage issues are one such issue. I have asked the officers to write to you direct when these details are available.

I also note your comments in respect of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) and your view that Mr Ferrin advised the Parish Council that the project required an environmental impact assessment. Having seen a transcript of the meeting held on 1 April, I understand that Mr Ferrin was invited in his capacity as Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways & Waste. The purpose of the meeting was initially to discuss traffic issues along the A20 and that the meeting agenda had later been broadened to include the lorry park proposal and the proposed application at Otterpool Quarry.

Having read the minutes of the meeting, Mr Ferrin clearly stated early on in the meeting that he was unaware of the proposed application at Otterpool. He would not therefore have had the benefit of a detailed briefing on this application, nor would he have been unaware that 6 months previously officers had already undertaken a formal screening opinion at the applicant's request in accordance with the EIA Regulations. As is necessary practice, this opinion was formed before the submission of the application and based upon information available at that time. That screening opinion concluded that a formal environmental statement was not required in this case. However in light of issues raised during the planning process and in accordance with EIA requirements, the planning authority will be reviewing whether an EIA is now required. You will however be aware from the earlier correspondence that the level of information provided in the application, is tantamount to the level of information required to be included in a formal EIA.

I trust this clarifies matters. Should you have any further queries in relation to the planning application at Otterpool Quarry, please do not hesitate to contact the Planning Applications Group direct. Yours sincerely,

Paul Carter
Leader of Kent County Council

Meeting with the KCC on 24th June at the Village Hall

The local papers recently published articles following the above meeting can be viewed in the section on the right below the 'letsrecycle website links' section.

Click on the newspaper article to increase the size.

Infringement under the Tort of Nuisance - The Proposed Recycling Plant at Sellindge

From: local resident (name withheld)
To: Angela.Watts@kent.gov.uk
Sent: Wednesday, 25 June, 2008
Subject: Re: The Recycling Plant at Sellindge

Dear Angela,

We had a meeting in Sellindge last night about the proposed recycling plant at Otterpool lane.

At the meeting my wife brought to the attention of the audience, the Company representatives and those from KCC, that the introduction of any Establishment causing obnoxious odours to nearby neighbours, is an infringement under the Tort of Nuisance. These people seemed to be unaware of the consequence that the recycling plant will bring to the village.

May I suggest that you contact your legal department and discuss the Tort of Nuisance, in particular the case Bliss v Hall (1838), L.J. C.P.122. When I studied Law this case was one of the main ones on Nuisance. I thought that it may have been superseded but after studying recent legal matters I found that it is still the case that established the Judicial Precedent.

Recently I was outside the Airport Cafe when a recycling vehicle drove into the car park. The stench was absolutely sickening and this was only one vehicle so what will the situation be with 150 vehicles? The proposed site is on the South side of the village and the prevailing wind comes from the South West so the stench will blown across a residential area.

Thank you.

Interim Schedule of Concerns re the Proposed Development of a Waste Treatment Plant and Associated Facilities at Otterpool Quarry - 24th June 2008

This document has been prepared for and on behalf of the residents of Sellindge and neighbouring villages including Newingreen, Lympne, Stanford with Westenhanger (The Residents) who would be adversely affected as a consequence of the proposed development of a Waste Treatment Plant at the Quarry Site on the corner of Otterpool Lane and the A20 in Sellindge.

It categorises the concerns of The Residents and expresses their concerns in summary form only. A more detailed report by the Sellindge and District Residents Association will be prepared and provided as a formal submission to Kent County Council Planning Applications Committee and our elected representatives.

1 Physical Appearance

1.1 There is a lack of information about the physical appearance of the proposal. No contextual elevations have been submitted with the application.

1.2 The size of the proposed development is completely out of proportion to the surroundings and to the needs of the local area population for waste disposal.

1.3 The planning application provides some indication of individual building heights. From this information we conclude that the proposed development would be overly dominant in the local landscape.

1.4 The proposed development would sit on rising ground above the village of Sellindge in a dominant position on the skyline viewed from the village.

1.5 It would also dominate the view from Folkestone Racecourse, parts of the Port Lympne Wild Animal Park, Newingreen, Westenhanger and, very importantly, from the North Downs AONB.

1.6 It would be visible from Farthing Common and other viewpoints on the Downs,

1.7 The main buildings would tower over the Airport Café on the A20, an important local landmark and meeting point, as well as other residential properties of Newingreen and the main part of Sellindge starting within 500 metres of the site.

1.8 There is a paucity of information in the application concerning the impact on the surrounding sight lines.

1.9 If this were a residential proposal of similar physical size, it would be rejected for the above reasons. For these reasons we request that an accurate visual representation of the proposed development be provided for public viewing in Sellindge Village Hall.

2 Traffic and Access

2.1 This proposal forecasts from 152 to 168 lorry movements in total per day. This number does not include vehicles required to remove waste water from the site, there being no consent to discharge waste water.

2.2 Our calculations show that were this operation working at full capacity, the already high proposed level of traffic movements is significantly understated.

2.3 Traffic movements required for staff and management appear to have been calculated without a clear statement of the actual numbers of personnel to be employed.

2.4 The effects of the additional traffic would exacerbate other traffic increases resulting from the further extension of the Lympne Industrial Park (Link Park 2) now under way, the proposed enlargement of the Holiday Extras site at Newingreen and increasing commuter traffic using Westenhanger Station.

2.5 The effects of additional traffic through the village of Sellindge, and especially the already busy A20 junction at Newingreen, would not be tolerated by The Residents, any more than the additional pollution and increased threat to safety.

2.6 We believe the traffic impact assessment conclusions to be flawed and significantly understated. The applicant should be asked to reconcile the assessment so that it is consistent with the proposed development operating at full capacity.

3 Operational Activities

3.1 There is nothing in the application which properly explains the proposed operation to the members of this community.

3.2 Residents are very concerned at the lack of information about exactly what material would be processed at the site, its origin and distance travelled, as in this respect the application appears to be at variance with the Proximity Principle underwritten by National Planning Policy Statements.

3.3 In the absence of any express discussion with the applicant, residents are unable to follow much of the logic as presented in the application, and the criteria used to reach conclusions on noise, odour and waste output.

3.4 The applicant is asked to provide full details of disposal and transportation of grey and black waters together with digestion plant process residues from the site within the declared lorry movements.

3.5 The application is silent concerning detailed movements of waste and other materials within the site and the applicant is asked to provide this.

3.6 The application does not show analysis that will have been carried out quantifying the risks to human health from airborne pollution, especially particulates and the necessary mitigation controls.

3.7 The Residents are concerned about the production of hazardous gases, including methane and hydrogen sulphide, and their discharge into the air above Sellindge and any potential danger this might pose to the area, The Residents, and the endangered species programme of the Port Lympne Wild Animal Park. These gases are a danger to health and we request a full independent safety report detailing any risks to health and quality of life from them in such close proximity to residential areas.

3.8 The applicant should be asked to provide a detailed process map to explain the methods to be used in all aspects of the operation of the plant, showing all controls and how these controls will be independently monitored to ensure effectiveness.

3.9 The output from the processes envisaged, including noxious substances, would need to be removed and The Residents are concerned about what exactly these products are.

3.10 Residents are concerned how output from the site would be moved safely, where it would be taken and by what route.

3.11 We are further concerned about any potential risk to public health in the event that any part of the processing stages fail and a build-up and/or backlog of inbound or outbound material occur.

3.12 Residents would under no circumstances be prepared to tolerate any accumulation of rotting and foetid waste building up within proximity of the Villages.

4 Environmental and Ecological Impact

4.1 The Residents are angered by the decision by KCC not to carry out a full Environmental Impact Assessment as required under European Directive and Town and Country Planning Regulations in relation to this application, including the thorough consideration of alternative sites. It is the view of this community that such a requirement must be met in full. Failure to do so will be robustly challenged.

4.2 We highlight that the Environment Agency list this site as vulnerable, being located on part of the Kent North Downs Wealden Aquifer.

4.3 The Residents of the area therefore require a full Environmental Impact Assessment to be carried out in respect of this application and that this be insisted upon by our elected representatives.

4.4 The Residents believe that this proposal is not in accordance with the requirements of the current draft Kent Waste Plan.

4.5 Residents are concerned at the absence of detail concerning bunding, containment of waste, hazardous materials, the control of hazardous operations, and a Safety Risk Assessment for this operation and the applicant should be asked to provide this.

4.6 Residents are concerned about proposals for the control and containment of vermin, flies and other nuisances.

4.7 We are concerned about the ecological and visual impact the proposed plant would have on the local area which includes the North Downs AONB

4.8 We are concerned about the effect this proposed development would have on the Folkestone Bed (Lower Greensand) Aquifer and potentially disastrous environmental consequences.

4.9 The proposed site is alongside a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). The proposed development would have inevitable affect by arresting groundwater movement, with consequential downstream impact.

4.10 The submission documents claim that the proposed development is environmentally friendly. Contrary to this our view is that it is environmentally unsound. It is certain that this proposed development would significantly add to the phenomenon of global warming by reason of all aspects of the project, and as such is unsustainable.

4.11 This application is the second commercial waste treatment facility within 1 mile of Sellindge and is absolutely unacceptable.

5 Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal

5.1 Drinking water shortages throughout the South-East are frequently headline news. The Folkestone Bed (Lower Greensand) Aquifer is the second most important source of drinking water supply in Kent. The proposed development jeopardises future opportunities to use this aquifer for public water supply, or other uses, and this is unacceptable for all of Kent. We reiterate our demands for a full Environmental Impact Assessment to be carried out.

5.2 The Residents are concerned that the application does not show how much water would be consumed by the plant when in operation. We believe that this must relate to the volume of liquids leaving the site although the application makes no reference at all to these matters.

5.3 The application refers to an existing consent to discharge surface water applying to the site. It does not. A surface water discharge consent was granted to Redland Aggregates in 1989 but has long been defunct.

5.4 We have noted that no active surface water discharge consent exists for this location. There is also no foul water sewer in reasonable vicinity of the site.

5.5 Sections of the local foul drainage network are already overloaded and under stress, overflowing when operating at full capacity, a fact logged by the residents of Westenhanger and the Environment Agency.

5.6 If the applicant intends to avoid employing road tankers to remove liquid waste from the site, a mains sewer to serve the site would have to be constructed, connected to the existing network, and that network extended and upgraded. We have yet to see the calculations of the waste output from the site and associated operations.

5.7 The Environment Agency requires full details of drainage proposals and protections for the site before it will consider or grant any plant facility operating licences. Detailed drainage design is a fundamental criteria for installations of this sort and should be evaluated within the main body of the planning submission. These issues are too important to be left to be dealt with as future conditional matters.

5.8 Groundwater levels in the local area are naturally high and the proposals do not show how the development would respond to this. The proposal envisages the construction of very large buildings, with correspondingly deep foundations for which no detail is provided. These must affect the local aquifer and groundwater flows. We require assurances and details of how these would be achieved without adversely affecting the groundwater.

5.9 We would expect the applicant to have to demonstrate site specific solutions to these fundamental issues.

5.10 The applicant states that conventional petrol interceptors will be used to remove contaminants from site area surface water run off. This technology would only separate any petroleum oils and not deal with water-borne contaminants. The application is entirely silent on the possibility of toxins escaping from the plant and methods of containment.

5.11 We are astonished that the application seems to have given these fundamental issues such little attention, and are most unhappy that the strategy to be adopted by the applicant for dealing with surface water drainage, foul water and industrial discharges is so unclear.

5.12 We would expect the applicant to demonstrate site specific solutions to these fundamental issues. The applicant is asked to specify their strategy, the risks associated with those matters, the controls that would be in place and the methods they would use to ensure all controls are effective.

5.13 These items are too important to be left to a condition in any proposed planning approval and we require the issues to be attended to before the application is considered.

6 Noise, Odour and Nuisance

6.1 Airborne particulates and dust from the Mixed Recycling Facility operation would soil the surrounding areas.

6.2 Insufficient study has been carried out to assess the true effect that noise and light pollution from the operation of the site would have on residents in Sellindge, Newingreen and Lympne.

6.3 Workers in the Lympne Industrial Estate would suffer diminished and unpleasant working conditions from the potential for airborne particulate spread.

6.4 Noise generation from on-site handling of MRF waste would include glass and metals “clattering” which would magnify the impact of intrusive noise.

7 Local Economic Impact

7.1 We are concerned about the effects that this plant, the traffic movements, the noxious odours, the prospect of airborne pollution, the visual impact and the operation would have on the local people, their economy and amenity.

7.2 The site is on a signposted tourist trail which highlights the beauty and history of the local area.

7.3 It would adversely impact the businesses of Folkestone Racecourse, Port Lympne Wild Animal Park, Westenhanger Castle and The Airport Café.

7.4 It would blight local property and depress values significantly.

8 Governance

8.1 The applicant should be asked to provide clear evidence of the strategy, economic case and business plan for this proposal. We believe that local waste output would be insufficient to satisfy a plant development of this size and that waste would be brought from increasingly greater distances to the site for processing.

8.2 The applicant should be asked to disclose details of any public contracts that it has been awarded in respect of this proposed operation and strategy.

8.3 We are concerned that additional requirements would have significant effect on the business case for this development. We have computed this to be marginal based on the consumption and extent of processing declared by the applicant.

8.4 We are concerned for public safety, the impact on public health and the dangers this proposal poses to the local environment and ecology. We are concerned that the application provides no information on disaster planning and this should be requested from the applicant before the application is considered.

8.5 We are concerned to establish the capacity of the applicant to withstand business interruption, given the information in the public domain about the applicant company's financial status.

8.6 We are very concerned that should the business plan for this proposal fail, in full or in part, this development would become an even greater and graver economic, environmental and ecological crisis for the local and surrounding community.

8.7 We request evidence of the applicant’s ability and bona fides to construct and operate a facility of such size which we believe would be one of the biggest in Europe.

9 Sustainability

9.1 This is not a sustainable solution to the problems of waste recycling, regionally or locally.

9.2 We are extremely concerned that the extent of vehicle movements makes this an environmentally unfriendly proposition

9.3 There are no proposals for dealing with biogas. Methane, the main by-product, is 20 times more significant than carbon dioxide as a climate change gas.

9.4 KCC has a statutory obligation to develop a Waste Plan for the County. We know that they have been doing this for many years and this site has not featured in this debate. The Quarry site must not be regarded as acceptable simply as a matter of political convenience.

Summary

The Residents of Sellindge and surrounding areas have the above concerns and these will be presented to the members of the Kent County Council Planning Applications Committee when they visit Sellindge to hear the concerns of The Residents. This schedule will also be issued formally to place on record. The intensity of residents' views has previously been evidenced by a large attendance at a Parish Council meeting held on Tuesday 1st April 2008 and by a public march on 3rd May 2008 attended by over 600 residents.

Communication

This summary of the concerns of The Residents has been compiled from views expressed by Residents and specialists that have offered their support and help. It will be circulated to The Residents by email, village newsletters, or flyers and by placing it on http://www.slurry.org.uk/ which provides full information about the work of the Sellindge and District Residents Association on behalf of the Residents. It will also be copied to our current elected Parish, District and County Council representatives, and to the sitting Member of Parliament for the area.

Signed

The Residents of Sellindge, Newingreen, Lympne, Westenhanger, Monks Horton, Broad Green and surrounding areas

Date

24 June 2008.


© 2008 Sellindge & District Residents Association 998.080622
with thanks to CPRE Kent for their support.
Save Valuable Resources! Don't print this out unless absolutely necessary!

Meeting at Sellindge Village Hall with the KCC Planning Team - Tuesday 24th June, 7 pm

Dear all

A meeting has been called at Sellindge Village Hall with the KCC Planning Team at 7.00 p.m. on Tuesday 24 June.

Please be there!

We need the hall to be full to overflowing so that the message gets across, we do not want this enormous plant with its associated vermin, smells, pollution, dust noise and lorries in our village.

PLEASE COME - it is very important!! Can you spread the word to people who may not have a computer as well?

Thank You.

Response from a local resident to a letter received from the KCC re the Anaerobic Digestion Plant, Otterpool Lane

Letter from: local resident (name withheld)
To: Sharon Thompson, Head of Planning Control, Kent County Council

Subject: APPLICATION: SH/08/124 - Anaerobic Digestion Plant, Otterpool Lane

Thank you for your letter notifying us of the above planning application, however we can’t help wondering if this is not just a paper exercise your department is doing because it would appear that the owners of the proposed Recycling Plant seem to have employed contractors to clear the land and prepare it for construction. From that one can only assume that they are pretty confident that they will get the `Go Ahead’ sooner or later.

However we would still like to lodge our three main objections to this proposal which are `Smell’, `Transport’ and `Speed’. Before my recent retirement I worked as a Plant Engineer for chemical companies in Silver Town. London and Willow Lane, Mitcham. Both plants were forever being visited by the Environmental Dept. because no matter how good or modern their equipment they could not stop nasty smells escaping from the plant causing distress to the local population. It will happen here also because this plant is being sited too close to the village of Sellindge. This sort of plant really needs to be sited in an area already blighted by similar factories.

On the subject of Transport we have heard that a large number of Lorries will be needed to bring in the waste material and an equally large number to remove it once treated. We all know that the Lorries traveling from the west side of the plant will leave the motorway at junction 10 and travel through the village. A village which already suffers from a considerable traffic flow. We have heard that some Transport companies on the Lympne Industrial Estate had Planning Conditions imposed on them by the Planning Office to direct their drivers to leave the M20 from junction 11; if this is true then they (the companies) and the council are certainly not enforcing it. Therefore any similar conditions that you may apply to this application should it succeed, will go unnoticed.

With elderly people crossing to the doctors surgery and children crossing to the village school speed has always been a problem and a worry for the local population, a road that is fairly straight and therefore tempting for drivers to proceed down it at a faster speed than legally allowed and with the likely large increase in heavy lorry traffic it may be only a matter of time before we have a serious accident here. Even without the extra lorries, we need right now, some form of traffic calming measures built into this road, such as road islands or chicanes to help resolve this problem. (As at Capel-le-Ferne which is also an A-class road suffering from operation Stack).

Yours Sincerely

Stack roads misery to continue for at least a year

KM KentOnline published an article on 30th May 2008 - "Stack roads misery to continue for at least a year"

To view this article go via the 'Useful websites' section in the right-hand column.

The seventh email distribution of news regarding the proposed Lorry Park on the Aldington-Smeeth borders

By Cllr Peter Wood, 20 April 2008
Member of the Executive, Ashford Borough Counciland
and
Chairman, Aldington & Bonnington Parish Council

Welcome to the seventh email distribution of news regarding the proposed Lorry Park on the Aldington-Smeeth borders.

Dear All,

I have learnt that yesterday KCC stated at a KCC committee meeting open to the public that they had missed the window of opportunity this year for carrying out an Environmental Impact Assessment. They say that therefore a formal planning application is unlikely to be published until mid 2009.

This delay whilst highly regrettable in that it extends the period of blight on the communities affected does, I hope, give KCC the opportunity to have a thorough and open review of all the options available for dealing with the undoubted problems of both Operation Stack and overnight lorry parking. It also provides the ideal opportunity to conduct the pre-application public consultation previously mooted by KCC, but never implemented.

Thank you all for your continuing support.

Regards,

Peter

Cllr Peter Wood

The sixth email distribution of news regarding the proposed Lorry Park on the Aldington-Smeeth borders

By Cllr Peter Wood, 20 April 2008
Member of the Executive, Ashford Borough Counciland
and
Chairman, Aldington & Bonnington Parish Council

Welcome to the sixth email distribution of news regarding the proposed Lorry Park on the Aldington-Smeeth borders.

I draw your particular attention to the very important paragraph in [blue] text below.

Dear All,

There has been no concrete news (no pun intended!) forthcoming from KCC since the last email newsletter. That said, there has however been a fair amount of media-oriented spin coming from County Hall. In addition, the Leader of KCC has expressed some interesting views regarding the proposed Lorry Park – of which more below. We understand that the Department for Transport (DfT) has again made it very clear to KCC that, as things stand, the UK taxpayers will not fund the Lorry Park project and they have instructed KCC to put together a business plan if they wish to pursue the case. This business plan is scheduled to be presented to the Leader of KCC (and presumably the Cabinet and Members) around mid-June, after which it will be submitted to the DfT where it will no doubt progress slowly (especially given summer holidays) through official channels. On that basis, it seems highly unlikely that there will be any sign of a formal planning application until the autumn at the earliest.

You will recall the formal, detailed letter of objection sent by Officers at Ashford Borough Council to KCC on 7th April 2008 (copies available on request). I understand that, other than a very short letter of acknowledgment, there has been no response whatsoever to the detailed queries set out in the letter. One can only presume, indeed hope, that KCC is having difficulties formulating sensible answers to the points raised.

On the media front, the Kentish Express has continued to provide extensive and balanced news and views on the Lorry Park controversy. The TV and radio coverage of the campaign has slackened for the time being, but this is to be expected. That said, it must be acknowledged that all branches of the media gave excellent coverage to the hugely successful Sellindge protest march (attendance 500 – 600 people) at the beginning of this month – congratulations to the Sellindge Residents Association, who organised it.

[blue]Returning to views put forward by the Leader of KCC, he has apparently told MPs, MEPs and County Councillors that the media has been fully supportive of KCC’s Lorry Park proposals and that most of the coverage has been in favour of KCC and that hardly any negative coverage has been received. In addition, in the context of local resistance to the Lorry Park, the Leader of KCC has claimed to County Council members that he has received “very few letters from Aldington, and quite a few from round the County supporting.”

It’s inconceivable that the Leader of our County would be economical with the truth and so one can only conclude that his Officers have kept the hundreds of protest letters and emails from him. Clearly something must be done to bring the protests to the Leader’s direct attention, and to that end Matt Baldwin of the Lorry Park Alliance has penned the following message to you all.

Dear Lorry Park Alliance Member,

Paul Carter, the leader at Kent County Council, is claiming that he has received more letters of support for the proposed lorry park between junction 10 and 11 than against. We do not believe this to be the case, but would suggest that a second round of letter writing begin as soon as possible. It has also been suggested that letters be sent to his home address, addressed to Mr P Carter, rather than Cllr Paul Carter – he is more likely to open them if he believes they are private letters, and once open he will find it harder to ignore.

Mr P Carter lives at:

Langley Park House,
Langley,
Maidstone,
Kent,
ME17 3NQ
Langley

Some suggested themes for the letters:

· Why the lack of consultation with the public over the lorry park – maybe suggesting that he pays residents a visit
· Why did he announce the vast lorry testing station at the lorry park in such an underhand way and not through the normal channels (see previous Lorry Park news email)
· When is he going to make public the rationale behind the Aldington site and publicly state where the other 15 sites are and why they were discounted
· A planning application is currently before Ashford BC for a lorry testing station. If granted, that will remove the need for a testing station at the lorry park.

Paul Carter is also likely to respond with a standard letter – many of us will have already received a copy. If it doesn’t answer any specific points put to him, write back asking that he address your points personally rather than fobbing you off with a standard reply. This really annoys him as it takes up quite a bit of his time. And if he doesn’t respond, it does leave the door open for you to write again.

In terms of getting our message across, there are two Blogs that have been very supportive of our campaign and you might like to bookmark and monitor them. They are:

http://sludgeandlorrypark.blogspot.com

http://save-kent.blogspot.com

In the interest of ‘balance’ it would be churlish not also to draw your attention to:

· the KCC Leader’s blog, which is: http://www.kent.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/democracy-and-elections/cabinet/leaders-blog.htm

· a blog we believe to be supported by freight industry interests and/or Monserat Properties Ltd, which is: http://www.operationstack.co.uk

If anyone is aware of other relevant blogs please let me know.

Finally, if you have not already seen it, I recommend that you read CPRE’s formal response to KCC regarding the Lorry Park proposals “Taking the Sting out of Stack”. This can be downloaded from the CPRE website: http://www.cprekent.org.uk

I will continue to keep you fully informed as matters progress. If you are aware of anyone who wishes to be kept in touch, but who has not received this email, please ask them to contact me by email so that their details can be added to the distribution list.

I must again stress that my colleagues and I are not opposed to a solution for either Operation Stack or for overnight lorry parking. However, we are opposed to these current proposals which are ill-conceived and hastily cobbled together with inadequate evaluation of alternatives and without consultation. We also consider that KCC is seeking to impose a wholly local solution to a problem that is in fact a national and pan-European issue.

Thank you all for your continuing support.

Regards,

Peter

Cllr Peter Wood
Saxon Shore Ward
Member of the Executive
Ashford Borough Council
and
Chairman, Aldington & Bonnington Parish Council

Kentish Express - 15th May 2008

Click on the newspaper article below to increase the size....

Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) Website links

The CPRE have provided links to information on their website. Please have a look at these, which you can easily access via the right-hand column in the 'CPRE website links' section, immediately below the 'Contacts' section.

On-line Petition against the Lorry Park's proposed location

Here is a link to an online petition against the lorry park's proposed location. It just takes a minute to complete - together we can make a difference.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/lorrypark/

Recent Letter from Paul Carter to a local resident

Email from local resident to Sellindgesludge@hotmail.co.uk

Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 18:30
From: local resident (name withheld)
To: Sellindgesludge@hotmail.co.uk
Subject: Letter from Paul Carter

Please see copy of a letter from Paul Carter stating that there may now be an access road onto the A20!

Response from Paul Carter.......

Dear local resident

Re: Proposed Lorry Park

Thank you for your further E mail of 30 April 2008 in response to my previous communication regarding the above issue.

As I indicated previously, the proposal is in early stages of development and this is being done by our own team of designers. Neither Montserat Properties Ltd nor any other developer has been involved in the design of the site. We would however, wish to consider all options for running the site, including outsourcing, to ensure effective use of resources and achieving value for money and this may involve engaging the private sector. Under the proposal we would own the site and we would set the terms and conditions for operating and managing it, these will not be set by the private sector as you seem to imply.

Although the Government have not been fully supportive of a vignette system of charging HGVs I believe that this is a national issue and the Government must play a major role in this. We will work closely with the Government to resolve the funding issue.

We have looked at other options, for instance diverting freight to rail, encouraging the use of other ports, holding back lorry traffic at lorry parks remote from the Channel Ports, but none of them can provide a solution to the huge problem. Hauliers and HGV drivers prefer this route because this is the quickest and cheapest way to access Continental Europe.

The experience of rail freight through the Channel Tunnel has been particularly disappointing – last year only 1.2 million tonnes was taken by rail – far below the forecasts of 6 million tonnes before the Tunnel opened and significantly below the 3.1 million tonnes actually carried in 1998. This represents a market share by rail of some 2.5% by weight.

Eurotunnel has recently cut its prices for rail freight and it is hoped that the amount taken by rail will increase to around 6 million tonnes in five years. However to put this into perspective, this increase is less than the actual increase in freight coming through by road over the last two years.

The Highways Agency plan to introduce a moveable barrier, known as the Quick Movable Barrier (QMB), to help manage the traffic in Phase 1 of Operation Stack later this year. This involves the installation of a continuous barrier in the middle of the M20 London-bound carriageway between Junctions 11 and 12. This will allow non cross-Channel lorry traffic to proceed down the M20 towards Dover in contra-flow in one lane on the London-bound carriageway, while London – bound traffic proceeds in two lanes.

The performance of the QMB will be closely monitored and it will be of particular interest to see how quickly it can be put into operation. However, the proposed QMB will only cover Phase 1 of Operation Stack (ie parking around 800 lorries) and the two-week long disruption earlier this year required Phase 2 for the vast majority of the time. The Police will still bring all traffic off the M20 at Junction 11 so delays on the M20 will continue, but the affects of diversions onto the A20 should be significantly reduced. The QMB will not contribute to a solution to the Overnight Lorry Parking problem.

As the development of the proposal proceeds it has become evident that there may be a need for a minor access road from the A20 to the lorry park to cater for light service vehicles and the emergency services. Its use would be controlled and it would not be available to lorries. A similar arrangement exists at a number of motorway service areas and operates successfully without affecting the surrounding road networks. Access for HGVs to and from the site will be via on and off slips from the M20.

I note your comment that a major part of the lorry park facility would remain empty for much of the year. However, the disruption caused by Operation Stack causes huge inconvenience to the community in Kent and has significant impact on the local and national economies, on balance this is the best option.

With regard to preventing HGVs from parking on our local roads, I am on record saying, we propose that overnight HGV parking would be free at the lorry park. This will encourage HGV drivers to park here as opposed to them having to pay around £20 a night to park on a licensed site, as is the case now. The proposal means that there will be no excuse for HGV drivers to park on local roads overnight. At the same time HGV parking ban on local roads will be effectively enforced, and we should see an end to lorries parking on verges and laybys in many parts of Kent .

I hope that this has provided sufficient clarification and has allayed your concerns.

Letter to the Village from the Committee Chairman

Dear Sellindge Residents

Sellindge congratulates Sellindge! On behalf of all who live peacefully in Sellindge and the Sellindge and District Residents Association I would like to offer congratulations and thanks for the very impressive and enthusiastic turnout last Saturday 3rd May 2008. We also want to thank all those from the surrounding villages and even from London who supported us.

Estimates vary but we are certain that between 500 to 600 people joined the march between the Village Hall and the Airport Café. What was especially encouraging were the large number of young people from babes in prams to vocally active teenagers who made their protesting views very clear to both Countrystyle Recycling Ltd and the Kent County Council’s Planning Office. In fact partly due to the large volume of protest letters that have been sent and also to the large number of protesters on Saturday, Angela Watts, who is the Planning Officer for KCC with responsibility for dealing with the Countrystyle proposal, has said today that KCC Planning Department will be coming to Sellindge later in June. They will inspect the site and call a meeting for villagers to express their views directly to Planning Officers and others concerned with the issue

We also had very good press and television coverage managing to get excellent and much sought for placement on Meridian Afternoon News and the BBC’s South East News. Now we must continue to keep the momentum going if we are to defeat the proposals made by Countrystyle Recycling Ltd. Many have signed the general petition which we shall put to good use. We need to encourage as many as possible – in fact all of us need to sign a specific Petition which will declare opposition to the use of the Quarry as a site for processing waste of any kind. This Petition will go to the Planning Department of KCC and will be presented to the Planning Committee when they consider the proposal later this summer. It is vital that everyone in your home signs it as it will be directly taken in to account by Planning Committee members.

Your Sellindge and District Residents Association are now involved in preparing technical objections to the scheme in readiness for a Planning hearing. If anyone is able to offer technical advice we will be grateful for your assistance. I am very keen to begin investigating alternatives to the large scale treatment of 21st century municipal and industrial waste and would welcome anyone, but especially young people to assist. If a sufficient number of people volunteer we might be able to get a grant to help finance such a project.

We shall be keeping you regularly informed of our progress on all fronts. We are also planning other events during the summer that will express the unity of our views. Thank you once again for making a very considerable effort and in the glorious words of Ian Medgett ringing in our ears we look forward to meeting you all again soon:

“KCC – You can stuff your Lorry Park right up your Sludge Digester”

Ronald Lello
Committee Chairman

Protest March on 3rd May 2008

What a great turnout for Sellindge!!

In the top section of the right-hand column, you can find and easily click on the links to many more Photos, an Article in KentOnLine and two Videos of the march.

Otterpool quarry - Road Junction A20

From:local resident (name withheld)
Sent:27 April 2008 11.19
To:SusannePavelkova@aol.com; susancarey@rdwd.co.uk; Richard.bore@kent.gov.uk; Richard.Alderton@ashford.gov.uk; PHILIPPA.DALE@ashford.gov.uk; paul.carter@kent.gov.uk; jennyhollingsbee@fsmail.net; contact.centre@kent.gov.uk; sean.furey@cprekent.org.uk
CC: sellindgesludge@hotmail.co.uk
Subject: Otterpool quarry.Road juncion A20.

Dear Councillors.

It has come to my knowledge that the site that is rapidly steaming ahead is in fact an ancient Saxon burial site where 100 years ago there was an excavation and many burial artefacts were found. Should this not be a scheduled site?

There are many very ancient manors in this area so it has been inhabited for a long time. Berwick is probably the oldest in England given by King Canute to Eadsy a priest in 1032. Bellview was the home of the Constable of Dover and Warden of the Cinque Ports in 1216-1272 and was named thus because of the beautiful view. Westenhanger Castle is in Stanford but is very much part of Bellview, Berwick and Otterpool.

Have any archaeological surveys been carried out on this and the extension of the industrial park? The road just at this junction is with Barrow Hill ( burial place).

I feel that things are being steamrollered along before essential investigations have been done. We lost a lot of crucial ancient relics when the channel tunnel was built through Saltwood and I can see the same thing happening here. The more I learn about this area the more fascinating it becomes. We should be nurturing this area for tourists and advertising the history of this area, not putting it all under concrete .

Yours Sincerely

The fifth email distribution of news regarding the proposed Lorry Park on the Aldington-Smeeth borders

By Cllr Peter Wood, 20 April 2008;
Member of the Executive, Ashford Borough Council
and
Chairman, Aldington & Bonnington Parish Council

Welcome to the fifth email distribution of news regarding the proposed Lorry Park on the Aldington-Smeeth borders.

I draw your particular attention to the very important paragraph in [blue] text below.

Dear All,

Thank you to all those who attended the Lorry Park Alliance meeting held on Saturday 19th April at Brabourne & Smeeth Village Hall. The meeting was extremely well attended and brings the total number of people who have attended Lorry Park Alliance meetings close to 700. To this number must be added the many, many people who have expressed their support for the Lorry Park Alliance campaign, but have not attended one of the four public meetings.

Damian Green MP was able to attend the Brabourne & Smeeth meeting and he, together with members of the Lorry Park Alliance, dealt with a variety of questions related to the proposed Lorry Park. Unfortunately, Keith Ferrin (Kent County Council Cabinet Member for Highways), felt unable to attend the meeting and, even more disappointingly, KCC failed to provide an alternative speaker to represent their views. It is a sad reflection on the state of democracy when our County Council cannot, or will not, provide a spokesperson on what is, by any standards, a major infrastructural project of widespread interest and concern to a vast number of electors in Kent. We are however fortunate that the two MPs most affected by the proposal, Michael Howard and Damian Green, have constructively participated in the public meetings.

Cllr Paul Clokie, Leader of Ashford Borough Council, sent his apologies, but did provide a statement of his views on the Lorry Park issue and parts of that statement were read out at the meeting. Of particular note are Cllr Clokie’s comments that:

"Neither I nor the Council’s officers have been presented with any clearly evidenced rationale that off-motorway parking of the sort proposed is the right solution. Even if that case were to be made, we would still need to be convinced that the site proposed is the best available and that it is sustainable in terms of the medium to long term projections for freight traffic."

"So in response to the question as to whether I support the current proposals from Kent County Council? My answer must be that ‘No I do not’ as I strongly believe that there are other solutions yet to be explored."

"The report [Channel State of Freight Report ] goes on to suggest that these lorry parks [closer to Dover than Aldington/Smeeth] should be financed by the port of Dover, which seems a very sensible proposition that places no direct financial burden on the tax payers of Kent and reflects the causal nature of the problem. "

The full text of Cllr Clokie’s statement is attached to this email.

Particular points that were raised at the meeting included:

The timescale for publication of a formal Lorry Park planning application. On the one hand Keith Ferrin stated at last week’s public meeting that KCC’s planning application would be published 6 to 8 weeks from 1st April i.e. by end May latest. On the other hand he is quoted in this week’s press as saying that “a fully detailed planning application should be ready for consultation in a year’s time”. Given that one of the Directors of KCC very recently stated that “We still don’t know if a lorry park will work technically.”, it seems probable that the planning application will not see the light of day for quite some time. If, as now seems probable, the release of the planning application is some way away, then it is unconscionable that KCC have been so premature in their announcement of the Lorry Park proposals. Such recklessness only serves to cause grossly unnecessary anxiety and blight for the residents of the area.

The charge for using the Lorry Park. Both Paul Carter (Leader of KCC) and Keith Ferrin have recently stated that it is their intention that the proposed permanent Lorry Park for 500 vehicles should be free of charge. Their apparent motivation for this is that they believe, or have been misled into believing, that at a stroke this will eliminate all unauthorised overnight lorry parking in lay-bys and in industrial estates such as Orbital Park. However, the reality is that there will always be a large number of lorry drivers who, for a variety of reasons, prefer to park outside the confines of an organised lorry park. Parking fines will not deter such drivers as the UK does not aggressively pursue the collection of fines from drivers of foreign vehicles. A free lorry park also implies that access to the Lorry Park will not be as regulated as is currently the case with commercial lorry parks. Consequently, it is inevitable that the Lorry Park will attract permanent, or semi-permanent, residents including illegal ‘O’ license operators, and will become a dumping ground or storage area for surplus vehicles. Finally, such a free facility will put out of business what few commercial lorry parks we do have in Kent and in neighbouring counties – a curious economic strategy for a Conservative-led County Council.

The involvement of Monserat Properties Ltd. Many of you will recall that some years ago this company proposed a new motorway junction at Evegate, a link road to the A2070 and the concreting over of greenfield sites in the East Stour valley. Since those proposals were firmly rebuffed by Ashford Borough Council, local parish councils and residents, Monserat has been actively lobbying the government, KCC and various quangos and has retained its controlling options over much land in the area. It is Monserat who controls the land upon which KCC proposes to put its Lorry Park and Monserat has been actively supporting KCC’s proposals. Furthermore, behind the scenes, Monserat has been supporting and funding various groups who are actively lobbying in favour of the proposed Lorry Park at Aldington-Smeeth. Paul Bartlett (Deputy Leader of Ashford Borough Council) very forcefully made the point at the meeting that if the Lorry Park were to proceed, then it would be the thin edge of the wedge with companies such as Monserat seeking to exploit the situation and infill the green fields between Smeeth and urban Ashford.

The planning decision-making process. Many people expressed grave concerns regarding the undemocratic process, where KCC would be granting themselves planning permission. It was generally considered that were this allowed to happen then it would be a gross injustice and probably in breach of residents’ statutory human rights. The Lorry Park Alliance members and Damian Green all expressed the view that the planning application should be ‘called in’ by the government (i.e. taken out of KCC’s hands) and determined by a Public Enquiry that reported to the Minister of State. At some point in the future it will be essential for us all to lobby GOSE (Government Office for the South East) and central government to ensure that this ‘call in’ takes place.

Something that only came to my attention subsequent to the close of this Saturday’s meeting is the statement by Paul Carter in the latest edition of the KCC quarterly newspaper “Around Kent”. In a full page article devoted to the proposed Lorry Park “off Church Lane, Aldington” he refers to the lorry park for 500 vehicles and goes on to say “Adjacent to this is the potential for a vast testing station to be able to carry out comprehensive tests on potential illegal vehicles and an additional 2,500 ….. parking spaces for Operation Stack”. So it now appears that he expects Aldington/Smeeth to shoulder not only the burden of the previously announced 500 vehicle permanent Lorry Park and the 2,500 vehicle operation Stack Lorry Park, but also a “vast testing station”! He goes on to say “we are trying to design an environmentally sensitive solution to the treatment of this larger area.” I cannot understand how KCC, knowing of the adverse, indeed highly critical, reaction generated by their bungled announcement of the Lorry Park proposal, could use such an underhand tactic to announce the addition of this “vast testing station”. To make an announcement of such a major project buried in an obscure publication which many immediately ‘bin’, and others such as myself never receive, takes the concept of ‘burying the bad news’ to new depths.

I will continue to keep you fully informed as matters progress. If you are aware of anyone who wishes to be kept in touch, but who has not received this email, please ask them to contact me by email so that their details can be added to the distribution list.

I must again stress that my colleagues and I are not opposed to a solution for either Operation Stack or for overnight lorry parking. However, we are opposed to these current proposals which are ill-conceived and hastily cobbled together with inadequate evaluation of alternatives and without consultation. We also consider that KCC is seeking to impose a wholly local solution to a problem that is in fact a national and pan-European issue.

Thank you all for your continuing support.
Regards,

Peter

Cllr Peter Wood
Saxon Shore Ward
Member of the Executive
Ashford Borough Council
and
Chairman, Aldington & Bonnington Parish Council

Statement by Cllr Paul Clokie OBE, Leader of Ashford Borough Council

By Cllr Paul Clokie OBE, 19 April 2008;
Leader of Ashford Borough Council

I fully recognise the problems caused by overnight lorry parking in the borough and also by operation stack, both of which have frequently caused considerable inconvenience to the residents of the borough.

Neither I nor the Council’s officers have been presented with any clearly evidenced rationale that off-motorway parking of the sort proposed is the right solution. Even if that case were to be made, we would still need to be convinced that the site proposed is the best available and that it is sustainable in terms of the medium to long term projections for freight traffic. In addition, this project is currently unfunded and the government has declared that they will not pay for it, and so I believe that this proposal is unlikely to happen in the near future.

I am a great supporter of the Quick Moveable Barrier (QMB) and as such I wish it to be given a fair test and then, if successful, extended to between Junction 8 and Junction 9 – a proposal that was I understand put forward by the government, but rejected by Kent County Council. Such a QMB would at least keep Kent moving and would also use the substantial tarmac surfaces already extant rather than concreting over 70+ acres of Kentish green field. So in response to the question as to whether I support the current proposals from Kent County Council? My answer must be that ‘No I do not’ as I strongly believe that there are other solutions yet to be explored.

This leaves the question of overnight parking should the Truck-stop at Waterbrook close – a matter which is by no means certain. This would give rise to a far more difficult problem that may eventually lead to the need to find locations for about 500 lorries (in excess of 1,000 has been mooted). I do not believe that our borough is best suited for such purposes. Particularly so, as such a lorry park would need substantial and costly on/off works as it could not be accommodated at an existing motorway junction. On balance, I favour the view recently published by the Channel Corridor Partnership that stated:

“the main need is for additional lorry parking facilities on the Channel
Corridor, preferably at or near to the major ports/Channel Tunnel.”

The report goes on to suggest that these lorry parks should be financed by the port of Dover, which seems a very sensible proposition that places no direct financial burden on the tax payers of Kent and reflects the causal nature of the problem.

Finally, I view with great unease the fact that the County Council is single-handedly seeking to remedy a situation that is in reality a national and pan-European problem and, as such, requires resolution at that level.

Paul Clokie
19th April 2008

Update for villagers - Progress the Sellindge and District Residents Association has made in the fight against the Lorry Park and Sludge Dump

SELLINDGE STILL SAYS NO......

NO TO....

• RECYCLING PLANT - 154 LORRIES PER DAY - on top of what we already have!!!!
  
• NOISE 24/7
  
• SMELLS
  
• 40' HIGH BUILDING
  
• WATER POLLUTION

A petition will be doing the rounds in the villages, please do sign this when you get a knock at the door from our dedicated team of foot soldiers.

Please keep 3rd May 2008, free at 11am, for our walk/cycle/drive from Sellindge Village Hall car park, to the Airport Café. Please do come out in force and show the people of Kent we do not want their rubbish and to show Europe we don’t want the lorry park as a permanent feature on our beautiful landscape, when it will probably only be used a handful of times every year!

Once at the Airport Café we are hoping there will be live music and that you will enter into the party atmosphere!

The Committee members are:

• Ronald Lello - Chairman/Spokesman (tel. no. 01303 813140)
  
• Nick Taylor - Treasurer
  
• Margaret Ludlow - Village Networker (tel. no. 01303 813369)
  
• David Plumstead - Transport & Recycling
  
• Les Barratt - Water
  
• Bob Edden - Policy
  
• Ian Medgett - Ecology & Environment
  
• Penny Knight - Researcher
  
• Carol Taylor - Publicity

This website has been formed for easier communication with everyone, if you would like to enter information please email it to: Sellindgesludge@hotmail.co.uk

Carol can be contacted through the email address.

Response from Paul Carter, Kent County Council, to Local Residents' emails

Local Residents emails to Paul Carter with his response:

From:local resident (name withheld)
Sent:25 Apr 2008 15.34
To:Richard.alderton@ashford.gov.ukCC: Robert.bliss@shepway.gov.uk; paul.carter@kent.gov.uk; Mick.Sutch@kent.gov.uk; Paul.Clokie@ashford.gov.uk; greend@parliament.uk; Howardm@parliament.uk; enquiries@environment-agency.gov.uk; sellindgesludge@hotmail.co.uk

Subject: Lorry Park - Sellindge and Aldington

Dear Sir,

I must voice my opinion with regard to the proposal to site a lorry park between Sellindge and Aldington.

The site itself is in the village of Sellindge and as a resident and knowing the amount of lorries which already come through the village the scheme would only cause more and more chaos to the already busy main road.

Do reconsider.
Yours faithfully

From:local resident (name withheld)
Sent: 25 Apr 2008 15:27
Subject: (no subject)
To:Richard.alderton@ashford.gov.ukCC: paul.carter@kent.gov.uk; Mick.Sutch@kent.gov.uk; Paul.Carter@kent.gov.uk; Paul.Clokie@ashford.gov.uk; Richard.Alderton@ashford.gov.uk; greend@parliament.uk; Howardm@parliament.uk; enquiries@environment-agency.gov.uk; sellers-support-reply@amazon.co.uk; sellindgesludge@hotmail.co.uk

Dear Sir,

I must protest about the current plans to site a lorry park in Sellindge/Aldington area. The area concerned is of natural beauty and KCC are trying to 'pull the wool over our eyes', by telling us it is a disused piece of land.

This part of Kent should not have to suffer schemes like this and particularly not in areas of natural beauty.
Yours

From:local resident (name withheld)
Sent: 25 Apr 2008 15:19
Subject: (no subject)
To:Richard.alderton@ashford.gov.ukCC: Paul.Carter@kent.gov.uk; Robert.bliss@shepway.gov.uk; editorial@kosmedia.co.uk; Mick.Sutch@kent.gov.uk; Paul.Clokie@ashford.gov.uk; greend@parliament.uk; Howardm@parliament.uk; enquiries@environment-agency.gov.uk; sellindgesludge@hotmail.co.uk

Sir,

So KCC seem to be trying to destroy this part of the Garden of England by building a lorry park between Sellindge and Aldington.

The villagers are in uproar - how dare the KCC try to spoil the Garden of England by proposing such a scheme ?

As you may know Sellindge is a small farming community and already houses many other facilities such as the High Speed Rail link and lorries which make their way from the Lympne Industrial site and which by the way is now being enlarged by some 50-70%.

To build a lorry park on what is obviously an area of outstanding natural beauty with wildlife and traditional woodland flowers there already, is not a good scheme.

We fear that the KCC Conservative party will never be voted for again.

In addition I would add that it seems to be that KCC are doing all they can to ensure The Garden of England will gradually become the Dustbin of England.

Yours,

From:local resident (name withheld)
Sent: 23 Apr 2008 14:27
To:paul.carter@kent.gov.uk
Subject: Proposed Lorry Park

So your true intentions for a lorry park in Kent are now revealed in the recent article in Around Kent, much as everyone suspected. No wonder that this part of a once beautiful county are so much against it. How can Kent County Council propose such a thing when their remit should be to PROTECT the County, not destroy it?????? Surely, no one will ever elect a Tory KCC in future.

From: local resident (name withheld)
Sent: 20 March 2008 11.19
To: Carter, Paul - LEADER
Subject: Anaerobic Digestion and Lorry Park at Sellindge.

Dear Sirs

As a resident of Sellindge on the A20, I have witnessed the increase of heavy traffic, and a lorry park that would over double the population of Sellindge with all the drivers at the Ashford end, and a smelly dirty industrial waste plant the Folkestone end I want to voice my objections to in the strongest manner. The lorry park would be quite inadequate as over 9000 lorries pass daily on the M20 and the rate of increase is supposed to be by 15% yearly and int he plans Ref YO8/0124/SH, for the sludge plant it guesses an extra 150 heavy lorry movements daily, the existing A20 is not up to that amount of traffic as it is in need of constant repair as large holes appear daily.

The light pollution, smells, noise and the death of wild life is not viable. When the Converter station was built in Church Lane, it was on a nesting site where all the plovers/lapwings nested, they were driven away and have not come back to any nearby location. I noticed yesterday that where all the trees have been cut down near the Lympne Industrial Estate that there are dead badgers, so their habitat has been disturbed already. We in Sellindge and the surrounding villages do not want the Garden of England to be covered with concrete and an industrial waste plant here. It is unsuitable planning. Yours sincerely.

From: local resident (name withheld)
Sent: 11 April 2008 10:34
To: Carter, Paul - LEADER
Subject: Sellindge Sludge

I am emailing you not surprisingly to express our concern over the proposals for a Sludge Site and Lorry park in and around Sellindge. My husband and I have taken a huge financial risk buying a property in Sellindge but felt the quality of life for our two daughters was worth the risk.

We moved to Sellindge last February and have enjoyed every day living in the village. Our daughters attend the nursery and our eldest will be starting the local primary school in September.

Now we hear the proposals for destroying our community we are wondering why we tried to improve our quality of life by moving out of town. We both work so hard and feel great bitterness and resentment that such proposals can and will negatively affect our lives if allowed to go ahead.

My concerns at present are the quality of life that will be affected but I am sure if this goes ahead it will have a huge financial implication on us. Our home is our home but also our childrens futures, which some people who live somewhere else seem quite happy to take away from us as it doesn't affect them !!

My husband and I strongly oppose the plans and desparately hope sense prevails and both proposals are stopped !!

Paul Carter's response was the same to these................

Sent: as appropriate
From: Paul.Carter@kent.gov.uk
Subject: RE: as appropriate

Dear .................
RE: PROPOSED LORRY PARK

Thank you for taking the time to write to me about the proposal to create a lorry park adjacent to the M20 east of Sellindge.

Your comments have been noted and are appreciated.

You will no doubt be aware that Operation Stack is invoked when Channel Ferry or Channel Tunnel crossings are disrupted, generally because of inclement weather or industrial action. This can happen between 8 and 12 times a year, closing long stretches of the M20 to local traffic so that lorries bound for the port can be parked on the motorway.

The ensuing traffic chaos this brings to the county not only costs the economy millions of pounds, it also causes widespread inconvenience to people living in, working in and visiting Kent.

In addition, the problem of a lack of secure overnight parking for lorries results in them using lay-bys and side streets causing damage and pollution and leaving behind waste and litter. Demand has been intensified due to drivers’ hours’ legislation which means drivers have to stop in Kent on the inward part of their journey.

It has been suggested that the Port of Dover or Eurotunnel should fund a solution to Operation Stack. However as much of the country’s trade with Continental Europe passes through Kent, this is very much a national problem, which is why we have been pressing the Government for several years to resolve the issue.

With no other options on the table and given the effects on Kent’s economy and communities of Operation Stack and overnight HGV parking on local roads we decided that we must lead the way on finding a permanent solution.

Working with other agencies we carried out a study which found that there was a need for a lorry park in Kent and that it should be dual purpose. As well as providing secure overnight parking it should be available in the event of Operation Stack. The Freight Transport Association supports this proposal. We agreed with the Department for Transport that we would identify a preferred site.

The severe shortage of suitable secure overnight parking facilities means that drivers are forced to stop in unsuitable places such as lay-bys, business estates and some near to residential properties. This leads to inconvenience to local communities and environmental problems. This is particularly evident in Dover and Ashford and to a lesser extent in Shepway.

In order for the lorry park to provide an effective and workable alternative to Operation Stack, it has to be along the M20 corridor and fairly close to the Channel crossings. We looked at a number of sites before reaching a decision about which site was our preferred location.

Our preferred site is between junctions 10 & 11 on the south side of the M20 between Sellindge and Aldington.

The site, which covers more than 70 acres, was chosen for its good connectivity and proximity to the Channel Tunnel and Dover Docks and because it is isolated from built-up areas. The site is very close to the M20 keeping access roads to a minimum and therefore reducing the impact on the local environment. It is also shielded from view by the Sellindge Converter Station to the east, the M20 to the north, a railway embankment to the south and woodland to the west. There are no planning designations such as AONB or Special Landscape Area applied to this area.

To access the site, we propose on and off slip roads to and from the M20 on both east and west bound carriageways. The site will link to the eastbound carriageway via an overbridge or a tunnel if ground conditions permit. The site will not have access on to the A20.

The proposed site will provide 500 secure overnight parking spaces for HGVs and an overflow area for up to 2,500 additional HGVs during Operation Stack. The site will have appropriate security, a properly laid out parking area for HGVs, a canteen providing refreshments, toilets, showers and fuel. The remainder of the site will be kept as green as possible and extensive and sympathetic landscaping will be used to further reduce the visual impact.

I have said that the cost of building a lorry park should not fall on Kent’s tax payers. Currently 75% of the lorries crossing the Channel are foreign registered and enjoy cheaper costs than UK firms. I believe the best way to generate the capital to build and run the site is by introducing a vignette system of charges on HGVs entering the country, similar to systems already operating in Austria and Switzerland, we have proposed this to the Government. UK hauliers could be rebated by a corresponding reduction in Vehicle Excise Duty.

This would mean that overnight HGV parking would be free at the lorry park, encouraging HGV drivers to use it. The current cost a night to park on a licensed site is around £20.

The proposal means that there will be no excuse for HGV drivers to park on local roads overnight. At the same time HGV parking ban on local roads can be effectively enforced and we should see an end to lorries parking on verges and lay-bys in many parts of the county. We are proposing two further secure overnight lorry parks; one along the M2 corridor and the second along the M25.

We are in the early stage of the process; we have discussed the aims of the proposal with the Highways Agency, Kent Police, Kent Fire & Rescue Service and Ashford Borough Council. Their comments are expected by the end of April 2008.

This will be followed by a detailed planning process which will include a full public consultation.

I hope that this clarifies the situation and will allay your concerns.

Yours sincerely,

Paul Carter
Leader of Kent County Council

Information and Objection Contacts

There have been several very well attended meetings and a lot of media coverage about the plight of Sellindge and the environment with the threat of the lorry park and the Anaerobic Digester opposite the Airport Cafe. The email address is Sellindgesludge@hotmail.co.uk if you want to send any information that will help.

This website http://www.slurry.org.uk/ (stands for Sludge/ lorry) enables any news to be spread quickly without anybody else's involvement.

This campaign is amazingly very intensive but we still need your help. We still have time to state our objections to:

Cllr Paul.Carter@kent.gov.uk - leader of KCC,
Mick.Sutch@kent.gov.uk - head of planning KCC,
Cllr Paul.Clokie@ashford.gov.uk - leader of Ashford Borough Council.
Richard.Alderton@ashford.gov.uk - head of planning and development,
greend@parliament.uk - Damian Green Ashford MP
Howardm@parliament.uk - Michael Howard Folkestone and Hythe MP enquiries@environment-agency.gov.uk
and of course all the local papers.

Keep May 3rd 2008 at 11am free to walk from the Village Hall to the Airport Cafe for a bit of a party.

SELLINDGE SAYS NO TO SLUDGE

Sludge and Lorry Park

Dear Resident

Your local district and county councillors are opposed to the announcement made by Kent County Council this week to build a lorry park on the outside of Sellindge and we are currently formulating a plan to fight this with our colleagues from Smeeth and Aldington and interested parties in the village.

If like us you are opposed to this plan, make your voice heard in every way possible - as many times as possible.

There will be a series of public meetings with one at Sellindge Sports Centre, Swan Lane Sellindge at 4pm on Saturday 29th March and one at 6pm on Saturday 29th March Aldington Village hall. In the meantime, many of you are asking what you can do.

Write, email or call all of the people on the right under the section 'Contacts at the Council and Press' to express your opposition and copy us in so we can add your names to our mailing lists (both email and letter).

If you hear the subject being discussed on local radio - please get in touch with them and make your views known.

We will keep you updated with news as it happens.
Kind regards

Jenny Hollingsbee
District Councillor
Snowdrop
Swan Lane
Sellindge, TN25 6EB
jennyhollingsbee@fsmail.net

and

Susan Carey
County Councillor
North House
116A North Road
Hythe, CT21 5DY
susancarey@rdwd.co.uk

Folkestone Herald - 07.08.08